OT: MGoBloggers Needed To School Wanting Minnesota Gophers in the Fine Arts
The University of Minnesota - Twin Cities (UMTC) is set to hold an event this spring designed to help its female undergraduate students achieve more and greater orgasms.
Gopher Beavers Lacking Skilled Partners
"The program is costing the university $3,406 and is part of the university’s mission of “research” said Gopher Spokeswoman Patricia Mattress.
Where have you gone, Joe DiMGoBlogger, our Gophers turn their lonely muffs to you, ah woo-woo-woo.
January 29th, 2013 at 10:19 AM ^
January 29th, 2013 at 10:25 AM ^
I'll be there...all in a days work
January 29th, 2013 at 10:26 AM ^
At Michigan, in South Quad, with this person, for example.
January 29th, 2013 at 10:51 AM ^
but it's Patricia Mattern.
January 29th, 2013 at 10:58 AM ^
I'm down
January 29th, 2013 at 12:13 PM ^
That's a good way to start.
January 29th, 2013 at 1:53 PM ^
January 29th, 2013 at 11:06 AM ^
Downvoted for the general tone of condescension. Sexual education is woefully lacking in a lot of the country, and that just refers to the basic mechanics of sex and how to engage in sexual practices safely, which is to say nothing about women being educated about their own sexuality and their own bodies. These programs, as much as they inspire adolescent "heh heh heh" from most, do serve an important function for a lot of women, and it's pretty ridiculous that even the article the OP linked to put "sex educators" in condescending quotes, despite the fact that it sounds like they are professionals who host these programs for a living.
Even MadMonkey's joking post above* highlights the degree to which culturally we just assume that female sexuality is incomprehensibly complex, if we acknowledge it at all. It's sad that educating women and their partners on how to enjoy sex more and find more sexual fulfillment for women is considered a joke.
(*Which I have no problem with and am not singling out as a bad example of anything.)
January 29th, 2013 at 11:32 AM ^
to be a bias against using humor to facilitate serious dialogue and learning.
Society has long used humor to make taboo/uncomfortable subjects accessible for discussion. Comedians like Lenny Bruce and Richard Pryor were funny because they made their audiences squirm when the mirror was turned back on them. Their subjects were very serious, but the humor was undeniable.
Female -- and male -- sexuality is complex precisely because individuals are complex. It is similar to the discussion of race in this country. Humor is often used to start a conversation, but there are places where humor must not tread without offending or trivializing.
Granted, the comments above (including my post) do not pretend to serve as an introduction to a serious dialogue about human sexuality. I admit I went for the cheap laugh, and sorry if I caused offense.
January 29th, 2013 at 11:56 AM ^
I totally agree that humor is essential for discussing sensitive topics. I actually went back and edited my original comment to specify that I didn't think your post was out of line. I don't think it's offensive at all; human sexuality is highly complex. Cheap or not, I thought it was funny. I have absolutely no bias about using humor (as someone who had to fill in for a Human Sexuality professor and deliver a 90 minute lecture on genital anatomy to a class of undergrads, I totally appreciate levity while a 10 ft diagram of a vagina is overhead).
There's a huge difference between making jokes about sex and making jokes (implicitly or explicitly) about shaming people for wanting to educate or be educated about sex. I'm all for the former, and generally annoyed by the latter.
January 29th, 2013 at 11:33 AM ^
uptight. I'm guessing they probably don't need your help or outrage.
Their website states their programs “use a mixture of interactive activities, lecture, discussion, multimedia, funny stories, and question and answer.” “Nothing embarrasses us, and no topic is too basic or risqué,” it adds. Miller previously told Yahoo News about how “amazing” it would have been to “be a fly on the White House bedroom wall during the JFK presidency” and watch the president engage in sexual escapades.
January 29th, 2013 at 11:51 AM ^
I'm confused, you're saying I'm too uptight about sex? I'm not upset about their program. I think it sounds perfectly fine, and I totally appreciate candor and having a sense of humor about sex. I'm not outraged about the program or anything, just the idea that the article linked is making a not so subtle attempt to shame the university into not hosting these kinds of events that I think provide a real service to the community.
January 29th, 2013 at 11:42 AM ^
January 29th, 2013 at 1:38 PM ^
What's to understand? You get a boner, slap her titties around some and then stick it inside her and pee.
January 29th, 2013 at 2:38 PM ^
Am I the only one who pictured Dave Brandon saying this... and vomited?
January 29th, 2013 at 11:03 AM ^
I just spent 5 minutes reading the comments after that article. I'd like those 5 minutes back please.
January 29th, 2013 at 1:52 PM ^
January 29th, 2013 at 11:11 AM ^
alphabet.
January 29th, 2013 at 1:32 PM ^
January 29th, 2013 at 12:20 PM ^
Had to read it several times, but I finally figured out what the OP is saying in the title. In this case, "school" is the verb and "wanting" is an adjective.
January 29th, 2013 at 4:06 PM ^
"to" is a preposition.....
January 29th, 2013 at 1:14 PM ^
I signed in just so that I could either neg this or pos this but I couldn't decide which, now I'm just sitting here left to wonder what I'm doing.
January 29th, 2013 at 2:25 PM ^
This same class/clinic has been at UofM also, as well as about 100 other highly respected colleges and universities, although in reading through the list, I don't think there was a single Minnesota college not on the list (save St. Kat's, which, well, obvisouly).